Advertisement

Advertisement

Study of miners heightens aluminium fears

By PHILIP RAPHALS in Montreal

A GROUP of Canadian miners has suffered mental impairment after repeated
exposure to airborne aluminium powder at work, according to researchers
in Toronto. The findings, announced by Sandra Rifat of the University of
Toronto, add to the evidence that aluminium is toxic to the brain.

Between 1944 and 1979 the McIntyre Mining Company and many other mine
operators in northern Ontario deliberately exposed their workers to McIntyre
powder, a form of powdered aluminium, for between 10 and 20 minutes each
day. They did so in good faith, aiming to protect the men from silicosis,
a severe lung disease caused by exposure to silicon dust.

However, many miners opposed the use of the powder and, as evidence
mounted that aluminium might affect the brain, their unions pressed the
Ontario Ministry of Labour to investigate. In 1979 a study by the ministry
found that evidence for the safety and effectiveness of the powder was insufficient,
and the companies stopped using it. Since then, the unions have pressed
for studies into the effects of the powder.

McIntyre powder was developed in the 1940s by scientists at the McIntyre
Research Foundation and the Banting Institute of the University of Toronto.
It was designed to bind with silicon dust, creating a stable and inert compound
that would not damage the lungs. ‘Animal studies were convincing, and chemically
it makes sense,’ said Rifat. ‘The problem is, how do you know how much is
needed, and what becomes of the excess?’

Advertisement

Rifat traced more than 1000 retired miners between the ages of 60 and
70. Of these 250 had either died or had left the area. Of the remainder,
673 agreed to participate in a study. Those who had worked in gold and uranium
mines had been exposed to the powder for between six months and 36 years.
The duration of exposure for each miner was documented in company records.
A group of miners from nickel and copper mines, where the powder was not
used, served as controls.

The researchers interviewed each man and asked them to complete three
different standard cognitive tests which measure, for example, short-term
memory. Overall, 13 per cent of the miners exposed to the powder showed
signs of cognitive impairment, compared with 5 per cent of the control group.

In men exposed for more than 20 years, the effect was more pronounced,
with one-fifth of the exposed group showing impairment. And there was a
clear dose-response effect, says Rifat: the longer the period of exposure,
the poorer the performance. Her analysis was adjusted for differences in
education and other factors, such as previous head injuries, that could
affect performance.

Rifat says this is the first clear evidence that occupational exposure
to aluminium can affect mental ability. But she stressed that the cognitive
tests merely measure behaviour and cannot make a specific medical diagnosis.
Announcing her results at a conference in Toronto, Rifat said she hopes
to do studies to determine the physiological cause for the defects.

Donald McLachlan, a colleague of Rifat and a leading researcher into
aluminium’s effects on the brain, said he had been trying for years to obtain
the data. ‘They were stonewalling us,’ he said. Finally, the Ontario Ministry
of Labour asked the mining companies to cooperate. A spokesman for the McIntyre
Research Foundation was not available for comment.

Norman Carriere, the health and safety coordinator for the Ontario district
of the United Steel Workers of America, which represents many Ontario miners,
says that the mining unions had opposed the use of the powder since the
1960s. They had argued that silicosis could instead be prevented by adequate
ventilation and respirators.

Canadian law bars workers from suing the companies they work for, but
the unions are now fighting to obtain compensation for those affected. Rifat,
however, says the companies should not be blamed. She points out that deaths
from silicosis declined steadily over the period. ‘But there is no way to
know if that was due to the powder or to improvements in ventilation and
other hygiene measures implemented during that period,’ she says. ‘We now
have evidence that it (the powder) caused harm, but at this point it’s impossible
to know if it was beneficial as well.’